Five Questions with Brad Treliving

[sureLoss]

https://www.nhl.com/news/calgary-fla...?tid=278387990

good read the other questions are on Gulutzan calling out the team after the monreal loss, Brian Elliott's play, and Curtis Lazar

Did you see any signs maybe as you were coming out of the All-Star break, or better yet going into it, that would lead you to believe this kind of run was possible?

"I mean, I'm not going to sit here and say we thought we were going to see this, but we did see a couple things. I really believed in our group. Chemistry and mix often get overlooked. I think those are real critical things. It's a group that gets along and it's a group that likes each other. So that's No. 1. A lot of our data, the things that we study and look at and evaluate and analyze, was good, and it's been good for a longer stretch than just this little run. It's not just the traditional analytics; it's playing more of the game in the other team's zone than ours, sort of our completion percentage. Just our execution of the things we want to do was better. We felt we're doing some good things. Our shooting percentage was down and our save percentage was low. So we looked at it and saw our special teams play, our 5-on-5 play, those numbers have been good for a fairly decent amount of time so if we can execute and get our goaltenders and our team defending at a level I think we're capable of I think we'll be able to have some success. That's sort of what has happened."

Another guy who has had a real strong season is Mikael Backlund, who is leading the team in points with 47. Did you see this coming from him, the production, the all-around game? I've seen some discussion about him being a Selke Trophy candidate even.

"I think [he should be]. I think so. He's been really good. What I've noticed since I've been with him, and it's just three years, is he's one of those guys who came into the League as an offensive guy, took some time to find his way but has turned into a reliable guy. He's first over the boards in every situation. I think we went six games in a row where he never got an offensive zone faceoff. Six games. That's a lot. So we bury him defensively. He sees the other team's top lines. He's the first over the boards in penalty kill, 6-on-5, power play, 4-on-3, 3-on-3 -- he's turned into an every situation type player. Above all that the maturity I've seen in the time I've been here is he's now one of the guys at the front of the bus taking responsibility for wins and losses. What I mean by that is it's not just about his game, his game is now secondary to really dragging the group along and being the guy at the front of the bus to say, 'I'm going to take a real responsibility about getting two points on each given night.' But he's a very rare player that gets tapped on every situation and is producing."

[Backlunds_socks]

Does Backlund get an A?

[Heavy Jack]

For sure he does, he could be a captain someday on some teams IMO, mega impressed with his play.

[Ozy_Flame]

Backlund is turning into a classic success story of being patient and developing a prospect long-term.

Even though it took 7-8 years to get to this point, all it takes is one Cup win to make it all worthwhile. And that window is in the next 2-5 years, while he is playing in his prime.

[belsarius]

6 games without an offensive zone start, playing the opposing top line, every situation and still putting points on the board night in night out. Hell forget points, the line drives the team, the passion, the compete level. Don't get me wrong, the Flames need the flash and talent in the youngsters, but the heart of this team beats because of guys like Backlund, Giordano, Stajan and Engelland.

[sureLoss]

Burke on 960 says that when he first got to Calgary he thought Backlund was an expendable player... done a lot to change his mind.

[Backlunds_socks]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Backlund is turning into a classic success story of being patient and developing a prospect long-term.

Even though it took 7-8 years to get to this point, all it takes is one Cup win to make it all worthwhile. And that window is in the next 2-5 years, while he is playing in his prime.

Agreed, its ok once in a while. But this shouldn't be acceptable. People keep referencing Backlund when Bennet comes up, we don't have another 6-years to wait for Bennett to ripen.

Another thing thoough: Backlund just hit is PRIME @27.

[Finger Cookin]

Originally Posted by Backlunds_socks

we don't have another 6-years to wait for Bennett to ripen.

Of course they do.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Backlunds_socks

Agreed, its ok once in a while. But this shouldn't be acceptable. People keep referencing Backlund when Bennet comes up, we don't have another 6-years to wait for Bennett to ripen.

Another thing thoough: Backlund just hit is PRIME @27.

I don't agree at all. It's completely ok to take time to develop players, especially as you point out, Backlund has really just reached his prime. It's not like Backlund was uselss prior, just like Bennett isn't useless now. I'm not saying I'm not hoping Bennett doesn't come around much quicker, and I'm not saying it's not important for the Flames for him to come around quicker either, but Bennett will take what he takes to come around, assuming the Flames are developing him right.

What teams need to be cognisant of is when they need players playing in their prime. It's a team need and trade off question about whether the Flames have 6 years (using your example) to wait for Bennett to come around. If the Flames think their true window is before that time frame, then they should probably move Bennett's future potential for some win now talent. If they think their true window is 4 or 5 years down the road, likely makes sense to wait.

For the record I don't think it's going to take Bennett as long as it took Backlund to reach his potential, so I get this is all hypothetical. But what interests me is you said the Flames don't have time to wait for Bennett, but then went on to say Backlund just entered his prime. If you believe the 27 year mark is around when players hit their primes (I think at the very least most are still playing their best hockey at that age anyway), how do you figure the Flames don't have time to wait given the age of almost all of our key players?

[shotinthebacklund]

Originally Posted by Backlunds_socks

Agreed, its ok once in a while. But this shouldn't be acceptable. People keep referencing Backlund when Bennet comes up, we don't have another 6-years to wait for Bennett to ripen.

Another thing thoough: Backlund just hit is PRIME @27.

Historically, 27 is when a player was supposed to be in this prime. things have skewed a little into the younger side but Backlund has improved almost every year.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Backlunds_socks

Agreed, its ok once in a while. But this shouldn't be acceptable. People keep referencing Backlund when Bennet comes up, we don't have another 6-years to wait for Bennett to ripen.

Another thing thoough: Backlund just hit is PRIME @27.

Why? Is the world ending?

I don't get this train of thought.

Bennett is already a 3rd line center on a playoff bound team, and is getting better every game. With Monahan and Backlund in place, Gaudreau and Tkachuk in place, Bennett and now Lazar in place (If Treliving and Burke's belief in this kid is on-point) - we have the makings for 3 great lines for a long, long time.

The Flames are poised to be one of the deepest teams in the NHL. That's a very good position to be in - and Bennett is a big part of it.

[Gaudfather]

Originally Posted by Backlunds_socks

Agreed, its ok once in a while. But this shouldn't be acceptable. People keep referencing Backlund when Bennet comes up, we don't have another 6-years to wait for Bennett to ripen.

Another thing thoough: Backlund just hit is PRIME @27.

Flames fans have been a bit spoiled by recent examples such as Monahan and Tkachuk where 18 year olds were able to play meaningful roles with the team from the get go. The more usual development process is more like 3-4 years to really learn and adjust to the NHL game. Bennett is on track and I would expect a meaningful step up in his impact in another year or two.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Burke on 960 says that when he first got to Calgary he thought Backlund was an expendable player... done a lot to change his mind.

In Burke's defense, Backlund was an expendable player back then. Just amazing how much he has progressed.

We thought Bennett would step up this year and give us two great centermen.

Well, now Bennett can step up next year and give us three great centermen!

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Backlund is turning into a classic success story of being patient and developing a prospect long-term.

Even though it took 7-8 years to get to this point, all it takes is one Cup win to make it all worthwhile. And that window is in the next 2-5 years, while he is playing in his prime.

Cup win is a really high bar to set for success.

For team success, I'll be okay with a few playoff round wins and a conference final appearance at some point. It's not like any of that has been a regular thing for this franchise.

I also think we should appreciate the luck that Backlund is breaking out at exactly the right time for this team.

[Huntingwhale]

Of course we have time to wait for Bennett. While we'd all like to see players jump into the NHL right away and become like Monahan or Tkachuk, we've been spoiled recently by some of our key guys coming straight out of junior and producing.

6 years from now? Unless 26 is the new 36, that's right in his prime years and he'll have a completeness to his game that he lacks right now. Imagine we'd traded away Backlund at 23 when he was struggling and we got to watch him develop into the player he is on another team. We'd never hear the end of it.

Time is on Bennett's side Mr. Socks.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Burke on 960 says that when he first got to Calgary he thought Backlund was an expendable player... done a lot to change his mind.

Backlund is a great story, I think at some point we all gave up on Backlund but he and the club placed their faith in each other and its worked out very well for both sides.

[JerryUnderscore]

Originally Posted by Itse

Cup win is a really high bar to set for success.

For team success, I'll be okay with a few playoff round wins and a conference final appearance at some point. It's not like any of that has been a regular thing for this franchise.

I also think we should appreciate the luck that Backlund is breaking out at exactly the right time for this team.

I completely agree with this. I'll be honest, I don't really care that much about winning the Stanley Cup. Sure, it would be (ney... will be) awesome to watch them win the Cup. However, there is so much luck involved in actually going all four rounds and winning. It's not just as simple as building the best team and having that team win.

I'd much rather see us build a quality team that year over year is in the conversation for league leaders (i.e., Chicago, Pittsburgh, Washington, etc.) than I would see us mortgage the future in order to have one or two years of deep runs before needing to rebuild again.

Maybe the league has changed and this isn't a reality anymore, but that's certainly the dream.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Gaudfather

Flames fans have been a bit spoiled by recent examples such as Monahan and Tkachuk where 18 year olds were able to play meaningful roles with the team from the get go. The more usual development process is more like 3-4 years to really learn and adjust to the NHL game. Bennett is on track and I would expect a meaningful step up in his impact in another year or two.

Top 6 picks, especially forwards, are expected to make an impact early. We may have been spoiled that both Monahan and Tkachuk did so in their first eligible year but lets not pretend the expectations for a 4th OA pick and a 24th OA pick like Backlund are the same. The reason people suggest trading him is that he might still have the perceived high end prospect value which he might never live up to and thus we might be better off trading him now before his "4th OA" value turns into "3rd liner" value. (For reference, Bennett is 12th in his draft for PPG).

Now that you all have your panties collectively in a bunch, I personally think his value is probably higher on the Flames vs. in a trade at this point. He'll be on a cheap bridge deal and still has plenty of time to break out. If the opportunity to swap him for a really great long term addition is out there then sure, do it but there's no reason to sell low for the sake of it. Bennett and his small cap hit will not be a concern going forward even if he doesn't improve.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by polak

Now that you all have your panties collectively in a bunch,

Remember when you weren't here for three months?
That was awesome.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Locke

I think at some point we all gave up on Backlund

IIRC Backlund has always had his defenders on this board.

While it's fair to say that Backlunds rise to one of the stars of the team is probably a bit of a surprise to most, he was praised as "elite" defensive center by some posters pretty early on. That certain poster who suggested Backlund would be playing in the KHL was pretty generally laughed at.

To put it another way, Backlund has made it easy to be patient. All that was really required was for people to not label him useless just because he wasn't playing as well as many had hoped.

And yes, that's very much how I see Bennett too. It's hard to say how high Bennett will rise eventually, but he's already easily earning his spot on the team. For me that makes it easy to wait.